Your comparison is very helpful as these are exactly the kind of questions I have been mulling over before I decide on a purchase. The inbuilt tilt control of the Apollo camera is probably the main consideration - that said it is surprising the quality and contrast achievable with the QHY 174 variant camera. Thanks for making this video.
Fantastic comparison and explantions. All of you images are spectacular, so good I have trouble deciding between them. I purchased a ZWO ASI178 four years ago to use with my Quark attached to a and Orion ED80 F7.5 refractor. The ED80 was my original DSO scope that was collecting dust so decided to make it a dedicated solar scope. Needles to say I got side-tracted and did not do any solar imaging until now. After watching the this and other videos I know the 178 was not the best choice for the longer FL setup using the ED80 with a Quark so I purchased an ASI174MM Pro. The images are much better. Thanks for videos, I am finding them quite helpful. Cheers
I haven’t looked yet myself but I’m wondering if the frame rate is different across the 174 mini and it’s larger counterpart. I seem to remember OPT saying the larger of the two was faster. I did notice more pattern type artifacts in your 174 shot backgrounds. It seems like the other camera handled better. It’s interesting to see them compared. Both are popular. I just recently upgraded from a ZWO 290 to the 174. I only got one cloudy day with it but it’s certainly a joy to get full disc. I’m using Lunt’s 80 MT with a B1800 filter. I’ll have to rewatch your previous videos where you discussed exposure times. That seems to be a difficult topic to find definitive information on even tho most people in solar use the same handful of cameras. I’ve been lazy and just haven’t been scientific enough to determine how long I can expose for. 10-15 seconds seems to be the limit without surface features blurring but I often wonder how much of that is the seeing. Anyway, I absolutely love your videos. You’re hitting the mark on all the right topics.
Yes you can see in the photos my QHY174 suffered more from uncorrected newton rings than the Apollo M Mini. Regarding exposure times, my current thinking is assuming you can get 70+ FPS, capturing 1-2000 frames generally allows you to freeze seeing and not allow much to change on the surface of the Sun.
Hi I am interested to purchase this Camera , this cameras are available on EBay and they come from China ,you know if I have to paid extra when the camera arrives like Costums , taxes ? Thanks
Very interesting comparison. I use that Apollo-M Mini with my Lunt 40mm solar telescope @ f10 for full disc imaging but find that my ZWO ASI290MM gives better results with a 2.5x Barlow for imaging surface detail and proms.
Your comparison is very helpful as these are exactly the kind of questions I have been mulling over before I decide on a purchase. The inbuilt tilt control of the Apollo camera is probably the main consideration - that said it is surprising the quality and contrast achievable with the QHY 174 variant camera. Thanks for making this video.
Thanks for the input!
Fantastic comparison and explantions. All of you images are spectacular, so good I have trouble deciding between them. I purchased a ZWO ASI178 four years ago to use with my Quark attached to a and Orion ED80 F7.5 refractor. The ED80 was my original DSO scope that was collecting dust so decided to make it a dedicated solar scope. Needles to say I got side-tracted and did not do any solar imaging until now. After watching the this and other videos I know the 178 was not the best choice for the longer FL setup using the ED80 with a Quark so I purchased an ASI174MM Pro. The images are much better. Thanks for videos, I am finding them quite helpful. Cheers
Thanks. I'm working on a new video on how to choose a solar telescope I how to post soon. Cheers!
Not sure if there has been an update to the drivers since this video...but the ZSWO ASI174MM has offset control enabled now. Great comparison. Thanks
Great experiment and very helpful conclusions
Thanks James
EXCELLENT, thank you for this informative video 🔭
Thank you Mark. Can't I use the Apollo Solar Max on my 70mm Coronado Solar telescope. I don't use a Quark. I like the idea of seeing the whole disk
I haven’t looked yet myself but I’m wondering if the frame rate is different across the 174 mini and it’s larger counterpart. I seem to remember OPT saying the larger of the two was faster. I did notice more pattern type artifacts in your 174 shot backgrounds. It seems like the other camera handled better. It’s interesting to see them compared. Both are popular. I just recently upgraded from a ZWO 290 to the 174. I only got one cloudy day with it but it’s certainly a joy to get full disc. I’m using Lunt’s 80 MT with a B1800 filter. I’ll have to rewatch your previous videos where you discussed exposure times. That seems to be a difficult topic to find definitive information on even tho most people in solar use the same handful of cameras. I’ve been lazy and just haven’t been scientific enough to determine how long I can expose for. 10-15 seconds seems to be the limit without surface features blurring but I often wonder how much of that is the seeing. Anyway, I absolutely love your videos. You’re hitting the mark on all the right topics.
Yes you can see in the photos my QHY174 suffered more from uncorrected newton rings than the Apollo M Mini. Regarding exposure times, my current thinking is assuming you can get 70+ FPS, capturing 1-2000 frames generally allows you to freeze seeing and not allow much to change on the surface of the Sun.
Hi I am interested to purchase this Camera , this cameras are available on EBay and they come from China ,you know if I have to paid extra when the camera arrives like Costums , taxes ? Thanks
@@juancarlosdelasotta6375 I would recommend buying direct from Player One. They will ship to you. Customs & taxes depend upon your country
Very interesting comparison. I use that Apollo-M Mini with my Lunt 40mm solar telescope @ f10 for full disc imaging but find that my ZWO ASI290MM gives better results with a 2.5x Barlow for imaging surface detail and proms.
Awesome comparison, thanks!